MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/24730114241286892

Медицинская библиотека · Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2024

Primary Arthrodesis or Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Mactier Lachlan, Cox Genevieve, Mittal Rajat, Suthersan Mayuran

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries are often managed surgically with primary arthrodesis (PA) or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF); however, neither approach has been shown to be superior. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the functional and surgical outcomes of PA and ORIF in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

This study was performed as per the PRISMA protocol. Database searches were conducted on Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed libraries. Five RCTs were identified for inclusion involving 241 patients, of which 121 underwent PA and 120 underwent ORIF.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences in visual analog scale pain score at 2 years (mean difference 0.89, 95% CI 0.18-1.59), patient satisfaction (OR 10.04, 95% CI 1.78-56.76), and all-cause return to surgery (OR 27.31, 95% CI 12.72-58.63) were observed, all favoring PA. There were no statistically significant differences between PA and ORIF with regard to American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society midfoot scores at 2 years, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores, and unplanned return to surgery.

CONCLUSION

This study showed significant improvement in pain at 2 years, patient satisfaction, and all-cause return to surgery favoring PA in all instances. Given ORIF often necessitates a second operation for hardware removal, it is to be expected that all-cause return to surgery is higher in ORIF groups. Overall, these results do not have the power to confer an advantage to a particular approach because of significant heterogeneity. Further studies should focus on larger patient cohorts and longer follow-up, or analysis stratified by patient demographics and injury presentation. In the absence of clinically significant differences, cost-benefit analyses should be considered to answer the question of whether to "fix or fuse" for Lisfranc injuries.

Для цитирования: Mactier Lachlan, Cox Genevieve, Mittal Rajat, Suthersan Mayuran. Primary Arthrodesis or Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.. Foot & ankle orthopaedics. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/24730114241286892.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.